The purpose of this study was to analyze the effects of a peer-delivered Corrective Reading Program (CRP) (Engelmann, Hanner, & Johnson, 1989) with repeated reading in a rural high school setting. Students receiving peer-delivered instruction were pre- and posttested on the Gates-MacGinitie Reading Tests. Within program data were also taken. In addition, data were gathered on the performance of the peer instructors as well. The results of this study showed that, overall, students receiving the intervention over 1 academic year showed stable grade level performance in vocabulary and an increase of one and a half grade levels in comprehension on the Gates-MacGinitie. Students in level B1 of the CRP showed the opposite effect (increase of over 1 grade level in vocabulary and relatively stable performance in comprehension). Stable performance on both subtests was noted for the peer instructors. Other positive changes were noted in the within program data collected. Interobserver agreement data indicated the peer instructors collected data with a high degree of accuracy. The results are discussed in terms of the efficacy of using peers as instructors for students with disabilities in rural settings.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ButlerF. (1999). Reading partners: Students can help each other learn to read!Education & Treatment of Children, 22, 415–426.
2.
CarnineD., SilbertJ., & KameenuiE. (1997). Direct instruction reading (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
3.
CoulterG. (1997). A review of several studies of Corrective Reading. Effective School Practices, 16, 80–87.
4.
CushingL., & KennedyC. (1997). Academic effects of providing peer support in general education classrooms on students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 139–151.
5.
DowhowerS.D. (1994). Repeated reading revisited: Research into practice. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 10, 343–358.
6.
DuPaulG., ErvinR., HookC., & McGoeyK. (1998). Peer tutoring for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects on classroom behavior and academic performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 579–592.
7.
EngelmannS., HannerS., & JohnsonG. (1989). Corrective Reading series guide. New York: Macmillan/McGraw-Hill.
8.
GreeneJ.F. (1999, Summer). Another chance: Help for older students with limited literacy. Perspectives, 5–10.
9.
GreenwoodC.R., & DelquadriJ. (1995). Classwide peer tutoring and the prevention of school failure. Preventing School Failure, 39, 21–25.
10.
GregoryR.P., HackneyC., & GregoryN.M. (1982). Corrective Reading programme: An evaluation. British Journal Educational Psychology, 52, 33–50.
11.
GrigalN. (1998). The time-space continuum. Teaching Exceptional Children, 30, 44–51.
12.
GrossenB. (1999). The research base for Corrective Reading. SRA. Desoto, TX: Science Research Associates.
13.
HarrisR., Marchand-Martella,N., & MartellaR. (in press). Effects of a peer-delivered corrective reading program with repeated reading on the reading performance of at-risk high school students. Journal of Behavioral Education.
14.
HewardW. (2000). Exceptional children: An introduction to special education (6th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
15.
HomanS.P., KlesiusJ.P., & HiteC. (1993). Effects of repeated readings and nonrepetitive strategies on students' fluency and comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 87, 94–99.
16.
KameenuiE.J., & CarnineD.W. (1998). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
KasendorfS.J., & McQuaidP. (1986). Corrective Reading evaluation study. Lottery Project, Direct Instruction for low achieving and special education students (East County Special Education Region), San Diego County, CA.
18.
KoenigA., & LaytonC. (1998). Increasing reading fluency in elementary students with low vision through repeated readings. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 92, 276–292.
19.
LevyB.A., NichollsA., & KohenD. (1993). Repeated readings: Process benefits for good and poor readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 56, 303–327.
20.
LewisR.B., & DoorlagD.H. (1999). Teaching special students in general education classrooms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
MadridD., TerryB., GreenwoodC., WhaleyM., & Webber,N (1998). Active vs. passive peer tutoring: Teaching spelling to at-risk students. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 31(4), 236–244.
23.
Marchand-Martella,N., & MartellaR. (1993). Evaluating the instructional behaviors of peers with mild disabilities who served as first-aid instructors for students with moderate disabilities. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 15(4), 1–17.
24.
MartellaR.C., NelsonJ.R., & Marchand-, MartellaN.E., (1999). Research methods: Learning to become a critical research consumer. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
25.
National Center for Educational Statistics. U.S. Department of Education (1999). NAEP 1998 Reading Report Card for the Nation. (NCES 1999–459). Washington, DC: Author.
26.
SideridisG., UtleyC., & DelquadriJ. (1997). The relationship between classwide peer tutoring, spelling, and the social interaction of students with and students without disabilities. Research in Education, 58, 77–79.
27.
SideridisG., UtleyC., & GreenwoodC. (1997). Classwide peer tutoring: Effects on the spelling performance and social interactions of students with mild disabilities and their typical peers in an integrated instructional setting. Journal of Behavioral Education, 7, 435–462.
28.
SideridisG., UtleyC., & GreenwoodC. (1998). An intervention strategy to enhance spelling performance and social interaction and to decrease inappropriate behaviors of students with mild disabilities and typical peers in an inclusive instructional setting. Research in Education, 39, 109–124.
29.
SimmonsD., FuchsL., FuchsD., MathesP., & HodgeJ. (1995). Effects of explicit teaching and peer tutoring on the reading achievement of learning disabled and low-performing students in regular classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 95, 387–408.
30.
SmithT.E., PollowayE.A., PattonJ.R., & DowdyC.A. (1998). Teaching students with special needs in inclusive settings. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
31.
StoddardK., ValcanteG., SindelarP., O'Shea,L., & AlgozzineB. (1993). Increasing reading rate and comprehension: The effects of repeated readings, sentence segmentation, and intonation training. Reading Research and Instruction, 32(4), 53–65.
32.
WassonB.B., BeareP.L., & WassonJ.B. (1990). Classroom behavior of good and poor readers. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 162–165.
33.
ZutellJ., & RasinskiT.V. (1991). Training teachers to attend to their students' oral reading fluency. Theory into Practice, 30(3), 211–217.
